Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
We inform. You decide.
Monday, November 24, 2025
NEWS  |  CAMPUS

Judge rules in favor of UF law student expelled for antisemitic social media posts

The university has until Dec. 1 to return Preston Damsky to normal standing

Preston Damsky, a UF law student, received a verdict in court on appeal on his expulsion over social media posts.
Preston Damsky, a UF law student, received a verdict in court on appeal on his expulsion over social media posts.

A federal judge ruled today in favor of Preston Damsky, a former UF law student who was expelled from the university after posting anti-semetic statements on X.

Damsky’s attorney, Anthony Sabatini, said the ruling signaled the U.S. Constitution won.

“It’s a big win for free speech,” Sabatini said

UF has until Dec. 1 to return Damsky to normal standing, according to an order granting preliminary injunction by Chief Judge Allen Winsor. UF did not show how “Damsky’s speech constituted a true threat or was otherwise proscribable,” according to Winsor.

A university spokesperson declined to comment on the grounds that UF does not comment on ongoing litigation.

UF Hillel posted a statement on Instagram in response to a “court ruling that disregards violent threats made toward the Jewish community.”

UF must be a safe space where Jewish students can live and learn free from threats of hateful and antisemitic violence, the post said. UF Hillel hopes the university will take all necessary legal steps to protect the campus from those who threaten to harm them, it said. 

Damsky sued UF Sept. 14, arguing his expulsion violated the First Amendment. Both sides presented their arguments to Winsor in a preliminary injunction hearing Oct. 29. Winsor was nominated by President Donald Trump in 2019.

UF argued Damsky’s online speech was disruptive, and along with two seminar papers “promoting racist views,” he had caused students to fear him and disrupt the learning environment.

On March 21, Damsky posted on X to roughly 25 followers, “My position on Jews is simple: whatever Harvard professor Noel Ignatiev meant by his call to ‘abolish the White race by any means necessary’ is what I think must be done with Jews. Jews must be abolished by any means necessary.”

About a week after Damsky’s posted the statement, professor Lyrissa Lidsky, a Jewish member of the UF law faculty, replied and asked if Damsky would murder her and her family. 

“Surely a genocide of all whites should be an even greater outrage than a genocide of all Jews, given the far greater number of whites,” Damsky wrote in response.

Enjoy what you're reading? Get content from The Alligator delivered to your inbox

In responding to Lidsky, Damsky involved UF into his speech, UF’s lead attorney argued, and the exchange caused disruption on campus.

UF issued a trespass warning April 3 banning Damsky from campus for three years, citing the escalating rhetoric and threatening nature of his words. Until his expulsion was finalized Oct. 9, Damsky was still taking online classes as a law student.

Sabatini argued on Damsky’s behalf that his posts on X, made off-campus, were protected political speech. Schools must protect views, even if they’re unpopular and made off-campus, he said during the hearing.

“Damsky has been a controversial figure at the law school since he enrolled,” Winsor wrote. “He seems to enjoy pushing boundaries and provoking others.”

But UF’s argument that Damsky’s X posts constituted substantially disruptive school-directed threats and were unprotected speech, Winsor wrote, did not prove UF could punish Damsky for any of his speech.

Even if “ostensibly referring to violence,” an exaggerated, coarse expression of political opinion does not necessarily constitute a true threat, he wrote — Damsky did not indicate he would act on his statements of abolishing Jews.

“He is stating a view — even if a hateful and offensive one,” Winsor wrote.

Similarly, Damsky’s response to Lidsky wasn’t a “serious expression of a real intent to harm” either, he wrote.

Damsky’s March 21 post did not have a connection to UF at all, Winsor wrote, as it did not name any UF administrators, students or professors.

“Vindication of First Amendment rights always serves the public interest,” he wrote. “Conversely, the public has no interest in enforcing unconstitutional penalties or restrictions on speech … The public-interest and balance-of-harms factors favor Damsky.”

Email Maria Avlonitis at mavlonitis@alligator.org. Follow her on X @MariaAvlonitis.

Support your local paper
Donate Today
The Independent Florida Alligator has been independent of the university since 1971, your donation today could help #SaveStudentNewsrooms. Please consider giving today.

Maria Avlonitis

Maria is the Fall 2025 university editor of the Alligator. She previously worked as the university administration reporter Summer 2025. Maria enjoys walking her dog, and on the rare occassion she has free time, she loves attempting to garden and salsa dancing.


Powered by SNworks Solutions by The State News
All Content © 2025 The Independent Florida Alligator and Campus Communications, Inc.